AgingYouth
New member
hay88 said:
Well, the DGO has to work out his costs and P&L sheet what. If each band's supposed to do 30 tickets to cover his end, it has to be 30 tickets.
Paying to Play - How do you feel about it?
- Thread starter dontpassgo
- Start date
Well, the DGO has to work out his costs and P&L sheet what. If each band's supposed to do 30 tickets to cover his end, it has to be 30 tickets.
edder
New member
heh... however dodgy the gig organiser wanna be they gotta be professional lah.
it seems that this thread is veering towards DGOs whether or not they do their job properly.
I do know of some gig organizers in the past that were so disorganised... i dunno why they organise gigs for?
The passion is there but the know how and skills are simply not there.
Both sides need to do their part.
Look at it the other way, if your band can't perform (eg untuned guitars, offkey singing, bad time keeping) didn't your band just ripoff the organiser and the tickey buyers? Think. Think hard before you wanna go up and PLAY SOME GIGS YO....
oh and someone put up the link to youtube's final countdown video. If I were to pay to listen to that... damn....
it seems that this thread is veering towards DGOs whether or not they do their job properly.
I do know of some gig organizers in the past that were so disorganised... i dunno why they organise gigs for?
The passion is there but the know how and skills are simply not there.
Both sides need to do their part.
Look at it the other way, if your band can't perform (eg untuned guitars, offkey singing, bad time keeping) didn't your band just ripoff the organiser and the tickey buyers? Think. Think hard before you wanna go up and PLAY SOME GIGS YO....
oh and someone put up the link to youtube's final countdown video. If I were to pay to listen to that... damn....
lol.. well.. yea.. i do need to lose some fat.. no offence taken.. haha.. but im just trying to say a hypothetical situation.. might not be true though.. but all that guy does is come in here and diss gig organisers.. haah
plus.. what im trying to say is not whether you post your picture as your avatar.. lol.. but whether anyone in this forum has talked to the person or seen the person in the flesh before.. i guess u interpreted that part about the picture wrongly then.. 8)
plus.. what im trying to say is not whether you post your picture as your avatar.. lol.. but whether anyone in this forum has talked to the person or seen the person in the flesh before.. i guess u interpreted that part about the picture wrongly then.. 8)
edder said:
This
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5Ym5g3DR1M
or
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehGNDQ2VCsE
?
PatheinRaindropMoe
New member
edder
New member
hahahahaa.....
I actually like the pay to play concept a lot but in a different form.
limit the number of bands say 4 bands.
organisers are the bands ie. $$$$ are all from the bands.
45 minutes set per band.
then it is the perogative for all band members to sell the tickets as they have vested interest in the gig.
Only possible for more established bands.
New bands? Carry on!!! *limp wrist*
I actually like the pay to play concept a lot but in a different form.
limit the number of bands say 4 bands.
organisers are the bands ie. $$$$ are all from the bands.
45 minutes set per band.
then it is the perogative for all band members to sell the tickets as they have vested interest in the gig.
Only possible for more established bands.
New bands? Carry on!!! *limp wrist*
AgingYouth
New member
Bump!
3notesAbar
New member
This is the first and last time I'm posting on this thread. All I have to say:
If gig organizers want to profit off bands i.e. for moneyyyy...then they probably wouldn't be organizing gigs cos...? Its simply too much trouble just to earn chump change. Probably more productive working some odd job! So before we start blowing horns and whistles, like others said, look carefully before commiting to terms of a gig organizer - make happiness from being a musician, and not be a shit stirrer.
If gig organizers want to profit off bands i.e. for moneyyyy...then they probably wouldn't be organizing gigs cos...? Its simply too much trouble just to earn chump change. Probably more productive working some odd job! So before we start blowing horns and whistles, like others said, look carefully before commiting to terms of a gig organizer - make happiness from being a musician, and not be a shit stirrer.
penta-tonic
New member
hahahaha. after reading from page one til now i find all this very interesting. ok ive seen post where pple say its ridiculous to sell tickets to play. but interestingly enough, music is to play for pple to appreciate ya? so if the bands cant bring in the pple who will? get someone to be a crowd manager for the band then, but just rem, u gotta pay him to get the crowd in. now u see it, nothing in this world is free.
also, see it another way. band pple, organisers arent there for u to step on. u think to urself: 'damn hes always making profit while we are being exploited.' one thing, see it both ways, organiser takes pains to organise gig, he gets his money. u work ur ass off to sell tickets, u get ur exposure. esp for new bands.
and bleeding do away with the mindset that u should get all the money and that the whole world wants to see u, for a start. u wanna make it in the scene u gotta do a few things, first get ur act together. second, establish ur fan base. the way i see it i think its good for the ticket selling thing. cos say band 1 brings their own fans and band 2 brings their own fans. in the end its like a sharing of fan base cos maybe next time band 2 gigs hes got fans from both band 1 and 2.
from what i see it, good bands dont have a problem selling tickets cos pple are always wanting to see them play. its the bands which cant make it (cant tune properly, cant sing properly, got shitty gear problems) which dont seem to sell the tickets and thus complain. but i ask this question: is it the organisers fault that u are shit? is it the organisers fault that u cant even get pple to watch you play? cos when u cant get pple to watch u that means, ur music isnt appealing or u arent even up to a non-musicians standard. this is something which no1 can solve for u except u and ur band.
i think all the organisers should just make the music scene a niche where only deserving bands play. that said, even if my band were not part of that niche its ok cos den i already have the mindset that if there are setbacks and obstacles den i must push on ahead til im finally good enough to play. i wouldnt call the music scene a music scene if any ol tom dick and harry can pick up a guitar and go on stage and whack something out. (to put that into perspective id like to see pple complain that they arent given chances to be playing soccer in the premiership, but then, wheres the standard? if u want it, work for it!)
bands, if you are good, all the signs will be there such as plentiful gigs, and plentiful crowd. and until then, stop whining and bitching, pick up your instrument and play the hell out of it. when u become good, pple will take notice i promise.
all this is meant to be thought of in a logical sense where everything is a win win situation, both for organisers and bands alike. just my 2 cents having organised and played at gigs where the currency to play was the sales of tickets.
also, see it another way. band pple, organisers arent there for u to step on. u think to urself: 'damn hes always making profit while we are being exploited.' one thing, see it both ways, organiser takes pains to organise gig, he gets his money. u work ur ass off to sell tickets, u get ur exposure. esp for new bands.
and bleeding do away with the mindset that u should get all the money and that the whole world wants to see u, for a start. u wanna make it in the scene u gotta do a few things, first get ur act together. second, establish ur fan base. the way i see it i think its good for the ticket selling thing. cos say band 1 brings their own fans and band 2 brings their own fans. in the end its like a sharing of fan base cos maybe next time band 2 gigs hes got fans from both band 1 and 2.
from what i see it, good bands dont have a problem selling tickets cos pple are always wanting to see them play. its the bands which cant make it (cant tune properly, cant sing properly, got shitty gear problems) which dont seem to sell the tickets and thus complain. but i ask this question: is it the organisers fault that u are shit? is it the organisers fault that u cant even get pple to watch you play? cos when u cant get pple to watch u that means, ur music isnt appealing or u arent even up to a non-musicians standard. this is something which no1 can solve for u except u and ur band.
i think all the organisers should just make the music scene a niche where only deserving bands play. that said, even if my band were not part of that niche its ok cos den i already have the mindset that if there are setbacks and obstacles den i must push on ahead til im finally good enough to play. i wouldnt call the music scene a music scene if any ol tom dick and harry can pick up a guitar and go on stage and whack something out. (to put that into perspective id like to see pple complain that they arent given chances to be playing soccer in the premiership, but then, wheres the standard? if u want it, work for it!)
bands, if you are good, all the signs will be there such as plentiful gigs, and plentiful crowd. and until then, stop whining and bitching, pick up your instrument and play the hell out of it. when u become good, pple will take notice i promise.
all this is meant to be thought of in a logical sense where everything is a win win situation, both for organisers and bands alike. just my 2 cents having organised and played at gigs where the currency to play was the sales of tickets.
Just read a few more pages on this pay to play phenonmenon
Just my thoughts:
Let's take the recent FLOW for example.
For the main stage bands, I had severe Quality Control and ALL bands on the main Stage were paid to play (AND the MCs AND the Breakdancers AND the sound guy AND the roadies) - this is because we were confident that those acts would translate into sales and draw substantial amounts of people (Which they did), ultimately pushing the success of the event.
For the Secondary Pure stage, I had a pay to play system in place (Which was the decision of the Committee as well as the sponsors) - funnily enough, I voted against it. This was largely caused by the event exceeding its alloted budget, but I was fighting for a second band platform.
But here's what was surprising: Most of the younger, unknown acts eliminated themselves when faced with proper legal documentation and a formal agreement to take upon a risk. (even more scary was the prospect of being sued into oblivion by corporate bodies if they flout the terms of the contract) One example was Psych 4 who decided that moving so many tickets up front was an unjustified risk. Fair enough. The terms were stated clearly and there's all the paperwork needed to facilitated. On the other hand, we had a Vacant Affair that came up to us and exceeded all expectations by offering to move 60 tickets (and they did it well). Flybar's front man Ian was the first to take the offer and I was so impressed by his confidence that I promoted him to the committee.
Think about it from another angle. Ministry of sound was charging us close to 30k - so why doesnt anybody comment on that? essentially speaking, I'm PAYING TO USE.
From a promoter (gig organiser) point of view, you have to remember that this is MY JOB. It has to generate income for a few reasons:
Personal Reasons:
1. Income (pays rent, keeps me fed, keeps me wearing clean underwear)
2. Earns respect from industry peers
Social Imperatives
1. Promotes the live music scene
2. Allows bands to improve themselves
Commercial Angle:
1. Creates liquid revenue for future events (milage)
2. Generates statistics for sponsors
For future referrence, pay to play works but for UNTRIED acts or in circumstances where normal payment is UNFEASIBLE. The offer is simple, if I were to create a platform - I will create opportunity. So long as I deliver a good environment and more importantly, a show to be proud of playing in, I dont see why helping your promoter take a small risk ($50-200 compared to a whopping $52,000 risk for me.) is such an issue
On behalf of DGOs, I daresay this: If you are offered to play by certain parameters - you can accept or reject the offer. No one is forcing you to play. And each acceptance implies you accept the RISK that things might go wrong.
COMPLAINING SOLVES NOTHING
Thank you,
Love,
Saito
Just my thoughts:
Let's take the recent FLOW for example.
For the main stage bands, I had severe Quality Control and ALL bands on the main Stage were paid to play (AND the MCs AND the Breakdancers AND the sound guy AND the roadies) - this is because we were confident that those acts would translate into sales and draw substantial amounts of people (Which they did), ultimately pushing the success of the event.
For the Secondary Pure stage, I had a pay to play system in place (Which was the decision of the Committee as well as the sponsors) - funnily enough, I voted against it. This was largely caused by the event exceeding its alloted budget, but I was fighting for a second band platform.
But here's what was surprising: Most of the younger, unknown acts eliminated themselves when faced with proper legal documentation and a formal agreement to take upon a risk. (even more scary was the prospect of being sued into oblivion by corporate bodies if they flout the terms of the contract) One example was Psych 4 who decided that moving so many tickets up front was an unjustified risk. Fair enough. The terms were stated clearly and there's all the paperwork needed to facilitated. On the other hand, we had a Vacant Affair that came up to us and exceeded all expectations by offering to move 60 tickets (and they did it well). Flybar's front man Ian was the first to take the offer and I was so impressed by his confidence that I promoted him to the committee.
Think about it from another angle. Ministry of sound was charging us close to 30k - so why doesnt anybody comment on that? essentially speaking, I'm PAYING TO USE.
From a promoter (gig organiser) point of view, you have to remember that this is MY JOB. It has to generate income for a few reasons:
Personal Reasons:
1. Income (pays rent, keeps me fed, keeps me wearing clean underwear)
2. Earns respect from industry peers
Social Imperatives
1. Promotes the live music scene
2. Allows bands to improve themselves
Commercial Angle:
1. Creates liquid revenue for future events (milage)
2. Generates statistics for sponsors
For future referrence, pay to play works but for UNTRIED acts or in circumstances where normal payment is UNFEASIBLE. The offer is simple, if I were to create a platform - I will create opportunity. So long as I deliver a good environment and more importantly, a show to be proud of playing in, I dont see why helping your promoter take a small risk ($50-200 compared to a whopping $52,000 risk for me.) is such an issue
On behalf of DGOs, I daresay this: If you are offered to play by certain parameters - you can accept or reject the offer. No one is forcing you to play. And each acceptance implies you accept the RISK that things might go wrong.
COMPLAINING SOLVES NOTHING
Thank you,
Love,
Saito
madmonkeykungfu
New member
Face it. There are crowds of people because it was at MOS. Places like MOS and Zouk already has a consistent crowd-goer.
try holding flow at sembawang or fort canning.
try holding flow at sembawang or fort canning.
madmonkeykungfu said:
Pardon my french, but you are naive my friend.
Here's why I think what you just said was silly:
1. MOS does not open on a tuesday- their operation days are wed through to saturday. Their regulars wont show up on an unscheduled night.
2. And the event was ticketed with PRESALE, which accounted for most of the headcount. If the regulars 'walked in' because it was MOS, explain why there are so few door sales? Someone must have pushed those tickets.
3. I used MOS because it was a well known venue (people know where it is) with adequate light production and an existing P.A which circumvented the need to hire one. Its a great choice
You sound like you are trying to discredit our team. We just hired a busy venue and let the dollars roll in without much work, yes?
So why dont you hire ministry of sound or Zouk yourself, pitch the sponsors and execute the operations? DO SOMETHING, dont just post here.
One more:
4. If ministry has a large base crowd (which it does) explain to me why Firebrands had less than 300 people in the entire venue? on a THURSDAY during peak hour? (11pm)... Flow had 3201 (verified by MOS event manager Justin Ho). This number EXCLUDES staff and crew.
This is the last time I reply on this thread. Its irritating when someone seems not recognise effort
I'm off to Zoukout to catch Futon
reckless-sham
New member
visa said:madmonkeykungfu said:Face it. There are crowds of people because it was at MOS. Places like MOS and Zouk already has a consistent crowd-goer.
try holding flow at sembawang or fort canning.
i am certain it would have still hit 2500 to 3000+.
i dun think so. i think alot of them went cos they thought they wld be 'cool' or smth. it wld be 'cooler' to tell ur frens ur going to MOS rather then sembawang :lol:
Similar threads
